Readers' comments

It is curious to call Ollanta Humala as "copper-skinned man", while Alejandro Toledo is even more "copper-skinned man". Also will be important for readers outside Peru, to know Pedro Pablo Kuczynski is the quintessential "gringo" with 100% European ancestry, and Keiko Fujimori has 100% Japanese blood in her veins.

Unless the article wants to raise a racial issue between Humala and everybody else; I found inadequate to raise a racial issue in only one candidate and forget it for everybody else.

As Vargas Llosa describe it just a few days ago: having to choose between Humala and Fujimori would be as to having to choose between cancer and AIDS. As gruesome and disgusting as it is, but it depicts perfectly the political scenario after April 11th. Both options would represent a jump back in political stability (Fujimori) and economic growth (Humala). The idea of having to choose between the inexperienced daughter of an imprisoned formed dictator and a radical commander that is willing to follow the Chavez's model, has become a nightmare for most Peruvians.

I beleive your comments on Ms. Fujimori are not accurate and only reflect the fact that you have not read her plan for government or listen to her proposals. She is considered a candidate that defends free market, private property, free trade, openess to foreign investment, etc.

Not only in newspapers and magazines in Peru but also in reports from investment banks such as Goldamn Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the general opinion is that Ms. Fujimori is a guarantee to continue the economic policies started in the 90s. I must say that this is the first time I read an article from a magazine I respect that shows Ms. Fujimori as a risk for the economic future of Peru.

Contrary to the opinion of some, Humala is neither the problem, nor the solution. In my opinion is even worst, He is the symptom of a political establishment incapable of significantly reduce poverty in a country with one of the highest economic growth rates in Latin America. I agree with the article, even if Humala gets to the run-off, he may lose. However, will the democratic establishment learn the lesson this time? I really hope so...

In the 80's. Peru was at the brink of civil war. Today I see a lot of my friends traveling to Machu-Pichu and the rest of Peru in general, I see Peru's economy growing, and in general I think the rest of latin americans see the peruvian story as a success story.

I hope they don't ruin it all by electing Humala. That would be tragic.

It is quite important to understand Ms. Fujimori is not such a risk like Humala. Meanwhile Humala's background is risky for any serious investor, all other candidates are quite liberal.
However more than 50% (peruvian population) agrees to the current liberal model which is the reason Ollanta is not going to win the future elections. Around 20-30% don't agree to our current model as they don't receive any benefit from it, let's hope we will convince them in the next 5 years.

The cavalier, paternalistic and indeed, neocolonial prism through which Europe and North America see our continent, seems always reflected in the bylines of the so-called Western free press, whose armchair experts comfortably located thousands of miles away, always seem to know what's best for our nations. I'm no expert on Peruvian politics, but what little I have learned in the past few weeks,as I follow the presidential campaign, reasonably leads me think that that nation is beginning to wake up, and is getting ready to take its place in history, as the next jewel to fall freely from the crown of planetary imperialism led by the U.S. The historic memory of our nations, is what is actually passing the bill to our hapless counterparts in our former colonial/imperial centers of power. For too long in the 20th Century, American ambassadors acted in our Continent as imperial pro-consuls, and in some cases wielded more power than some presidents in the countries they served in. I'm sure Peru is no exception to that historic fact. Coincidentally, I was watching an alternative news source analysis tonight, regarding the Peruvian presidential debates, some of which I've been able to watch through the fine online broadcast of "El Comercio". Notwithstanding the so-called Peruvian macroeconomic miracle, it is estimated that about 10 million people in Peru live below the poverty level, out of a population of about 28 million. About 1 million children go hungry each day in Peru. With stark statistics like those, I'm afraid the media wars that the "free press" has gratuitously unleashed against the candidate of "Gana Peru", the "Bancada Nacionalista" and their allies, is falling on deaf ears. Ollanta Humala Tasso may not be the darling of your Canadian mining companies, or American oil interests and many other globalization conglomerates which harp about the Peruvian economic "miracle", which still cannot feed 1 million children. In short, Latin America is slowly but surely waking up, and marching to the beat of a different drummer. The Peruvian elections will be a portent of things to come I'm afraid, in Latin America, much to the chagrin of our armchair expert friends both in Europe and North America. :-)

It's also worth noting that part of Keiko Fujimori's platform is security. The Economist mentioned that drug violence and murders are high, and citizen security is a huge priority to many people. Fujimori is carrying on her father's name and has openly spoken about increasing policy and military forces if she is elected president.

The view of the article regarding Ms Fujimori is totally out of history and context. The Fujimorism political movement, in the 90´s, emerged as a criticism of the current way of doing politics, by the time called "politicos tradicionales" (traditional politicians), which was, among other things, naming friends and family for the public most notorious positions, to have parties in the goberment palace, and so on. The pinnacle of this form of doing politics was the first term of Alan Garcia. By the year 90, Peru was a disaster: very high inflation, rampant terrorism, absence of food in the markets, chaos, Etc. Etc. The fujimorism changed everything, posting a new constitution (93) that rule the new economy Peru has until this days: open economy; also defeated the terrorism and re-inserted Peru in the international markets, Fujimori had the very best professionals in the top government positions. The next two presidents did not advance in the democratic reforms Peru needed; Ms Fujimori have the best technical teen to do the reforms Peru need.

According to Wikileaks, high ranking officers of the Peruvian military and police are involved in drug traffic and raids and arrests are only made on rival bands and small traders. This is the inheritance of Fujimori's regime. That is just one reason why it is either cancer or aids. Humala, and to a lesser extent Toledo, has committed himself to broaden the economic basis of the country, to increase productivity and to fight poverty by focusing on industrialization. Productivity of extractive industries is world class in Peru. However, most people work in agriculture and fishing, retail, construction and transportation, all sectors with very low productivity. Good quality jobs are needed in the cities. They can only be created through industrial development. Growth based on extractive industries only is boom growth. Peru has experienced many busts in the past. Humala is an option only because for the past five years the ruling class has forgotten the last election's results. Unless created wealth is distributed more fairly, elections will remain a risky business to the status quo, I mean, to the economic stability.

To the economista and many other, i believe that you are being too hard on Ms Fujimori. Today I am 20 and i recall my mother telling me how she waited with me in her arms for my father. Listening to the bombs of terrorist groups and waiting for him under candlelight. We could not move from Lima due to the possibility of being murdered, and due to a lack of roads to other places in Peru. This is what Alberto Fujimori did. Putting aside how his government ended, people seem to have forgotten that it was him who eliminated terrorism, who created the roads and who built schools in every little village all over Peru. The presidents after him, Toledo and Garcia, had it easy, as the real problems had already been eliminated. However, due to a lack of maintenance, all the school and roads have began to degrade. Ms Fujimori, as she has said, will show people that the state has not forgotten about them, as has happened so many times before, and would, instead, plant the bases for a developed country. This not only in Lima, the capital, but also in provinces, where poverty is the highest.

As for Humala, he is a Chavez follower, as you have said. He will make Peru grow back 20 years, with all his changes in the constitution and the nationalization of private companies. However with the help of Lula's marketing advisors, he has changed his speech to look more democratic. However, this is just a lie. When you listen to him speak and you read his plan of action, you notice a lot of differences. I ask: why would someone try to disguise who he really is, if it not because even he knows it's not the best option? Answer: Because he knows that people will not want what he really offers.

On the other hand, Mr Kuczynski, is probably the best for the country. He has experience and a thorough knowledge in politics and economics. He will help Peru grow with foreign investment and will try and reduce poverty, not with the trickle down effect, but with actual help, such as services for all, schools, health care and legalizing informal businesses. He is what the country needs!

Your comments on Mr. Fujimori and his daughter Keiko are not accurate. In fact they are missleading to your audience. To say that Keiko's only plan is to liberate his father is an insult. Keiko was elected to Congress with the highest number of votes in the last election and has a solid economic plan prepared by an experienced team of professionals. She has the most experienced team of all candidates. Keiko and Humala are the only candidates that target the poor. Toledo and PPK are the candidates of the rich. The same ideas of Lourdes Flores that made Lourdes a loser in the last elections. Your analyst is out of touch with Peruvian reality. The candidates of the rich (Toledo and PPK) will get votes in Lima and with readers of El Comercio and Caretas but the grassroots do not wnat to know about them. This is not the first time that your analyst is out of the picture, and this time is going to be the same. The candidates of the poor (Keiko and Humala) will go to the second round as it happened in the last elections (HUmala y Garcia).
The differece between Keiko and Humala is that Keiko wants to help poor people with market policies and Humala doesn't. To say that Keiko is a risk for Peru's economic future is a lie that lowers the credibility of the Economist. Toledo's populist stance is a risk for Peru's economic future, Keiko stance is not.
Finally Mr. Fujimori put in place economic policies that benefitted TOledo and Garcia. Road, mine projects, schools, health post, new constitution, new institutions, all of them were put in place by Fujimori. High international prices allowed Toledo and Garcia to enjoy the benefit of the economic model put in place by Fujimori. Mr. PPK (Toledo minister) reduced public investment (in roads and social works) to the lowest levels in the last 40 years. This is a fact that poor people see every day in the abandoned towns of the interior of Peru. They remember the new schools and roads that Fujimori personally delivered every day. Toledo and PPK stayed in LIma never showing up. This is why poor people will never vote for them. El Comercio y Caretas during 10 years denigrated all the good work of Fujimori and his ministers but they manged to convinced only thehigh class. Readers of El Comercio and Caretas are you analyst and a bunch of high class Limeños. It is time to change your analyst.

It is true that Ms. Fujimori will continue the market-oriented policies. However, it is also true that she is terribly inexperienced, she is influenced by her father's former officials, she has a colossal conflict of interest since his imprisoned father still faces a 25-year sentence, she has built her political figure and campaign based in the memoirs of his father government (whom many Peruvians remember has one of the most corrupt governments) with few or almost anything of herself into it. She represents for many Peruvians going back to political instability, corruption and the lack of the rule of law.
Nevertheless, it is also true she has become the only option nowadays for many appalled Peruvians and she has become the only chance to protect the economic growth achieved in the last 20 years. A good percentage of Peruvians will go to the run-off holding their nose having to choose for the lesser of two devils.

Please correct the current (12 April 2011) image for this story.
Instead of Peru's Ollanta Humala, you have pictured Haiti's Michel Martelly in the current on-line story, "The risk of throwing it all away." (Originally published 31 March 2011.